[adorno]

...focusing on expanding NATO to provoke still more military conflict

And here I thought that joining a military defense pact with other countries, was to eliminate the possibility of a military conflict. Those in the treaty would enjoy defense by a much bigger military, and the potential enemies would be deterred from becoming aggressors against those in the joint military defense pact.

But, I guess I was always thinking backwards, according to the article above.

[Its All Over Except ...]

More than once, as with Libya, NATO wasn’t defending against a nation being an aggressor towards them, given that NATO offensively bombed Libya on Odumba’s behalf on unproven allegations that Gaddafi was going to kill 10k of his own people.

[Lurkinanloomin]

NATO’s reason for being evaporated in the early 1990’s.
It should have been disbanded.

[reformedliberal]

... thinking backwards...
_______________________________________

When all parties to a defense pact combine forces against a single, supposedly poorer, less-equipped, & less trained, opponent, the former ceases to be a defense alliance and becomes an offensive force. Striking back at bullies is often the only successful defense.

There are a glaring similarities in globo tactics in both C19 & Russia:

They never consider that stressed organisms adapt and evolve, nor that entire ecosystems are then destabilized in unforeseeable ways.

Come to think of it, the same mistakes are apparent in the televised back-patting fest being held in Davos.

Some sort of narcissism-induced selective blindness?